Саратовский научно-медицинский ЖУРНАЛ

Комплексный подход к диагностике и лечению коралловидного нефролитиаза

Год: 2018, том 14 Номер: №1 Страницы: 81-86
Рубрика: Урология Тип статьи: Обзор
Авторы: Чехонацкая М.Л., Россоловский А.Н., Крючков И.А., Бобылев Д.А.
Организация: ФГБОУ ВО Саратовский ГМУ им. В.И. Разумовского Минздрава России
Резюме:

Обзор литературы посвящен наиболее актуальным вопросам диагностики и лечения пациентов с мочекаменной болезнью. Показана роль и описаны последние достижения и преимущества малоинвазивных методов оперативного вмешательства. Широко освещены проблемы резидуальных конкрементов и состояния почечной паренхимы в периоперационном периоде. Затронута также тема выбора тактики ведения подобной категории больных. Рассмотрены актуальные диагностические методы и дифференцированный подход к выбору алгоритма обследования и лечения пациентов с коралловидным нефролитиазом. Представлен анализ научно-исследовательских сведений (реферативных документов), содержащих аналитический массив научных публикаций. Использованы информационные ресурсы библиографических электронных баз данных: eLibrary, PubMed, Clinical Key, Science Direct.

Литература:
1. Ramello A, Vitale C, Marangella M. Epidemiology of nephrolithiasis. J Nephrol 2000; 13 (3): 45-50
2. Tiselius HG. Epidemiology and medical management of stone disease. BJU Int 2003; 91 (8): 758-67
3. Черепанова E.B., Дзеранов H.K. Метафилактика мочекаменной болезни в амбулаторных условиях. Экспериментальная и клиническая урология 2010; (3): 33-40
4. Sountoulides Р, Metaxa L, Cindolo L. Is computed tomography mandatory for the detection of residual stone fragments after percutaneous nephrolithotomy? J Endourol 2013; 27 (11): 1341-8
5. Abreu LA, Fiedler G, Corguinha GB, et al. Review on renal recovery after anatrophic nephrolithotomy: Are we really healing our patients? World J Nephrol 2015; 4 (1): 105-10
6. Daggett LM, Harbaugh BL, Collum LA. Post-ESWL, clinically insignificant residual stones: Reality or myth? Urology 2002; 59: 20-4
7. Donaldson JF, Lardas M, Scrimgeour D, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical effectiveness of shock wave lithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for lower-pole renal stones. Eur Urol 2015; 67 (4): 612-6
8. Palmero X, Balssa L, Bernardini S, et al. Flexible ureterorenoscopy vs percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stone management: Retrospective study. Prog Urol 2016; 26 (9): 500-6
9. Урология: российские клинические рекомендации / под ред. Ю.Г. Аляева, П. В. Глыбочко, Д. Ю. Пушкаря. М.: ГЭОТАР-Медиа, 2016; 496 с.
10. El-Nahas AR, Eraky I, Shokeir AA, et al. Factors affecting stone-free rate and complications of percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of staghorn stone. Urology 2012; 79: 1236-41
11. Zhong W, Gong T, Wang L, et al. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones following failed extracorporeal Shockwave lithotripsy: different performances and morbidities. Urolithiasis2013;41: 165-8
12. Cenk А, Сад С Impact of residual fragments following endourological treatments in renal stones. Adv Urol 2012; 2012: 813523
13. Skolarikos A, Papatsoris AG. Diagnosis and management of postpercutaneous nephrolithotomy residual stone fragments. J Endourol 2009; 23: 1751-5
14. Osman Y, El-Tabey N, Refai H, et al. Detection of residual stones after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Role of noneennhanced spiral computerized tomography. J Urol 2008; 179: 198-200
15. Raman JD, Bagrodia A, Gupta A, et al. Natural history of residual fragments following percutaneous nephrostolithotomy. Journal of Urology 2009; 181 (3): 1163-8
16. Ganpule A, Desai M. Fate of residual stones after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A critical analysis. J Endourol 2009; 23: 399-403
17. Akilov FA, Giyasov SI, Mukhtarov ST, et al. Applicability of the Clavien-Dindo grading system for assessing the postoperative complications of endoscopic surgery for nephrolithiasis: a critical review. Turk J Urol 2013; 39 (3): 153-60
18. Tefekli A, AN Karadag M, Tepeler K, et al. Classification of percutaneous nephrolithotomy complications using the modified Clavien grading system: looking for a standard. Eur Urol 2008; 53(1): 184-90
19. Mousavi-Bahar SH, Mehrabi S, Moslemi MK. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy complications in 671 consecutive patients: a single-center experience. Urol J 2011; 8: 271-6
20. Rosette J de la, Assimos D, Desai M, et al. The clinical research office of the endourological society percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 5803 patients. J Endourol 2011; 25: 11-7
21. Shin TS, Cho HJ, Hong SH, et al. Complications of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Classified by the Modified Clavien Grading System: A Single Center's Experience over 16 Years. Korean J Urol 2011; 52: 769-75
22. Rosette JJ de la, Opondo D, Daels FP, et al. Categorisation of complications and validation of the Clavien score for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 246-55
23. Чехонацкая М.Л., Россоловский A. H., Бобылев Д.А. и др. Возможности компьютерной томографии в прогнозировании результатов дистанционной ударно-волновой литотрипсии. Медицинский вестник Башкортостана 2015; 10 (3): 240-3
24. Россоловский A.H., Чехонацкая М.Л., Захарова Н.Б. и др. Динамическая оценка состояния почечной паренхимы у больных после дистанционной ударно-волновой литотрипсии камней почек. Вестник урологии 2014; 2: 3-14
25. Чехонацкая М.Л., Россоловский A. H., Емельянова H.B. и др. Комплексная оценка состояния почечной паренхимы после дистанционной ударно-волновой литотрипсии у больных с нефролитиазом. В сб.: Актуальные вопросы урологии: эндокринологические и гинекологические аспекты урологического здоровья: Материалы межрегион, науч.-практ конф. Пенза, 2017; с. 82-85
26. Canes D, Hegarty NJ, Kamoi К, et al. Functional outcomes following percutaneous surgery in the solitary kidney. J Urol 2009; 181: 154-60
27. Omer B, llker S, Sakip ME, etal. Analysis of changes in the glomerular filtration rate as measured by the Cockroft-Gault formula in the early period after percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Korean J Urol 2012; 53 (8): 552-5
28. Nouralizadeh A, Sichani MM, Kashi AH. Impacts of percutaneous nephrolithotomy on the estimated glomerular filtration rate during the first few days after surgery. Urol Res 2011; 39: 129-33
29. El-Tabey NA, El-Nahas AR, Eraky I, et al. Long-term functional outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in solitary kidney. Urology 2014; 83: 1011-5
30. Fayad AS, Elsheikh MG, Mosharafa A, et al. Effect of multiple access tracts during percutaneous nephrolithotomy on renal function: evaluation of risk factors for renal function deterioration. J Endourol 2014; 28: 775-779
31. Handa RK, Evan AP, Willis LR, et al. Renal functional effects of multiple-tract percutaneous access. J Endourol 2009; 23: 1951-6
32. Raman JD, Bagrodia A, Bensalah K, et al. Residual fragments after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: cost comparison of immediate second look flexible nephroscopy versus expectant management. Journal of Urology 2010; 183 (1): 188-93
33. Heidenreich A. Modern approach of diagnosis and management of acute flank pain: review of all imaging modalities. Eur Urol 2002; 41: 351
34. Kennish SJ, et al. Is the KUB radiograph redundant for investigating acute ureteric colic in the non-contrast enhanced computed tomography era? Clin Radiol 2008; 63: 1131
35. Dundee P, Bouchier-Hayes D, Haxhimolla H, et al. Renal tract calculi: comparison of stone size on plain radiography and noncontrast spiral CT scan. J Endourol 2006; 20: 1005-9
36. Ray AA, Ghiculete PKT, Honey RJ. Limitations to ultrasound in the detection and measurement of urinary tract calculi. Urology 2010; 76: 295-300
37. Smith-Bindman R, et al. Ultrasonography versus computed tomography for suspected nephrolithiasis. N Engl J Med 2014; 371: 1100
38. Sountoulides P, Metaxa L, Cindolo L. Is computed tomography mandatory for the detection of residual stone fragments after percutaneous nephrolithotomy? J Endourol 2013; 27 (11): 1341-8
39. Park J, Hong B, Park T, et al. Effectiveness of non-contrast computed tomography in evaluation of residual stones after percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 2007; 21: 684-7
40. EisnerBH, McQuaid JW, HyamsE, etal. Nephrolithiasis: what surgeons need to know. AJR 2011; 196: 1274-8
41. Portis AJ, Laliberte MA, Holtz C, et al. Confident intra-operative decision making during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Does this patient need a second look? Urology 2008; 71: 218-22
42. Necmettin MM, Ozden E. Effect of urinary stone disease and its treatment on renal function. World J Nephrol 2015; 4 (2): 271-6
43. Kim SC, et al. Cystine calculi: correlation of CT-visible structure, CT number, and stone morphology with fragmentation by shock wave lithotripsy. Urol Res 2007; 35: 319
44. El-Nahas AR, et al. A prospective multivariate analysis of factors predicting stone disintegration by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: the value of high-resolution noncontrast computed tomography. Eur Urol 2007; 51: 1688
45. Patel T, et al. Skin to stone distance is an independent predictor of stone-free status following Shockwave lithotripsy. J Endourol 2009; 23: 1383
46. Jellison FC, et al. Effect of low dose radiation computerized tomography protocols on distal ureteral calculus detection. J Urol 2009; 182: 2762
47. Poletti PA, et al. Low-dose versus standard-dose CT protocol in patients with clinically suspected renal colic. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188: 927
48. Niemann T, et al. Diagnostic performance of low-dose CT for the detection of urolithiasis: a metaanalysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 191: 396
49. Altunrende F, Tefekli A, Stein RJ, et al. Clinically insignificant residual fragments after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: medium-term follow-up. J Endourol 2011; 25: 941-5
50. Kaufmann OG, Sountoulides P, Kaplan A, et al. Skin treatment and tract closure for tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: University of California, Irvine, technique. J Endourol 2009; 23: 1739-41.

Прикрепленный файлРазмер
2018_1_081-086.pdf286.23 кб

Голосов пока нет